The evening world., 1887-12-12
THE STREAMING MARRIAGE
DID JUDGE GILDERsLEEvE COMMIT 4
MISDEMEAN0R?

tccn-The indictment OF n Judge JJr..s
for an Alleged Defiance OF the Law.
In the Court of General Sessions on RI
day last John Straining was brought TO the
bar under ON indictment for felony in hay.
ing " led astray" q girl under the age OF
consent-sixteen. Straining pleaded guilty.
but declared that they were lovers and
anxious to marry, whereupon Judge Glider.
sleeve adjourned the court and performed
the marriage ceremony in the District Attor.
ney's Office, Col. Fellows acting as witness
and best man. The " happy pair" then Left
on their bridal our.
The Revised Statutes have for many years
included this among other sections of article
1, title 1, part 2, chapter 8.
SEC. ~. every ministerlor' mdofstrdts who shat,
solemnize a marriage where either OF the parties
| within his knowledge shall be under the oOe or Local
punishable by fine or Imprisonment. or both n
the discretion Of the court by which he shall be
SEC. 2. The age or legal consent for contracting
marriage shall be eighteen years in the case OF
males and sixteen In case or females. GAS amended
Feb. 81, 1880.
the age of the bride in this case, Mary Sui
livan, is fifteen years, her sixteenth birthday
coming in April next, it Is said.
been questioned by a reporter Of The WORLD
III regard 10 Unlb LlHTT1HRB, bH1u
THE lawful age at which a girl may marry
is twelve. The lawful age at which she may
consent to q marriage is sixteen. Her parents
may consent for her between twelve and six
teen and sell her to her husband; but the law
insists that such marriages shall be proclama-
ton only. A marriage by ceremony before
the girl is old enough to give consent isRa
misdemeanor.. This marriage shout have
been by proclamation; The parents con-
lection existed to the marriage. only to Judge
Gildersleeve ~solemnizing it. Section 70 does
not limit or restrict marriages. It regulates
the action of magistrates-that, and that
only.
That Judge Gildersleeve, for whom I
have the highest respect and esteem, COM
mitted a misdemeanor for which he bo
indicted by the Grand Jury and brought
before his own court for trial, If the story
published in the papers be true, there is no
doubt. The law is plain and imperative. Il
is not q technical offense, but a violation Of
the express words of the statute. He knew
the girl was within the age of consent, for
reason. If she had not been, the case could
not have come before him. There was no
reason why he should solemnize it. A
marriage by, proclamation would have been
equally valid, and the statute was passed to
prevent him from doing what he did do, and
for no other reason.
1T was certainly q judicial defiance Of
law which emphasizes most clearly what my
huhiChlob 1Ilculb bIuthlully mhlUthiu, tuhb
there is no law for the official-the man in
office that he is above and beyond the law,
which is intended merely as an instrument
by which he may Cypress and tyrannize over
the citizen. A policeman, for instance, when
in good standing, they say, is above and be-
yond all law.
Prove that my words are false if you can.
1t is easy enough to prove me q liar If I am
Go to every magistrate in New York one by
one and apply for a warrant for the arrest Of
Henry A. Gildersleeve for a misdemeanor.
Not one will! grant it. Ask a policeman to
policeman is likely as not to club you il you
are an honest citizen, and the magistrate to
sentence you to six months on the island for
interfering with an officer on duty.
=" 1t is the bold nature of this defiance Of
law that makes it worth notice. The cele-
brant is q Judge of the second highest
criminal trial court in the State, the witness
is the Associate District Attorney of the
county, who is in a few days to be the Dis
trict-Attorney. among the spectators is the
present District-A Attorney, recently elected
and next month to be a Judge of the court,
and the scene of this war dance on the
statutes is the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
There can be no plea that his action was
conducive to good morals, or that he meant
WE'LL The law did not forbid the marriage.
There was no legal objection to those two
people marrying; TIL law simply ordered
that it should be by proclamation and should
not be by ceremony. It forbade Judge Gil
dersleeve from solemnizing, but it did not
forbid him from witnessing the marriage and
signing his name to the marriage contract.
He did what the law forbade him to dosand
makes it q misdemeanor for him to do.
Why?
Until Feb. 81, 1887, the age Of civil con-
sent was fourteen. 1t may be that Judge
Gildersleeve, Mr.. MARITIME, Col. Fellows and
the other distinguished lawyers present were
ignorant of the law; but ignorance Of the
law does not excuse.
Last summer an Alderman was sum-
moned for s~olemniZing the marriage OF an
Italian girl under sixteen, and all the papers
had long accounts of the case. He was mot
arrested. He was not fined or imprisoned,
you will remember. He was merely admon-
ished, as he had a big pull
When questioned by a WORLD reporter.
Judge Gildersleeve said
Yes, knew of that provision Of the law,
but there is another provision of the code
which makes the age of q person, when
raised as a question, a question of fact for tie
Court to decide.
THE person may be brought into court
for inspection, or a medical examination may
be made, and the Courts decision is final 30
far as the proceedings are concerned.
This Sullivan girl was a big, plump
woman, weighing $50 or 160 pounds. She
was eighteen years old in my judgment, and
my Judgment, in the absence of o jury, was
final.
The judgment of the Court is better than
her own testimony, which was all we had,
and would have overruled the testimony OF
her parents had they been sworn"